Pre-Trial Proceedings: Do the Rules on Electronic Evidence Apply?

The Rules On Electronic Evidence render electronic documents as admissible evidence in civil and criminal proceedings. Does this apply the same way with respect to the stage before the filing of information to court prior to any civil or criminal proceedings or issuance of warrants of arrest? (in the sense that electronic documents carries the same weight as other types of information sources entailed in the preliminary investigation part and issuance of warrants of arrest)

In Criminal Procedure, one learns that before trial begins, there are various actions that need to be undertaken. Before trial would be allowed to proceed, information or complaint has to be filed first by the prosecutor or the supposed aggravated party. But before this information is filed, the prosecutor must first ascertain that there is an act or omission amounting to a crime under the law and that the accused probably is the author of that unlawful act or omission. On that basis, the prosecutor files an information to the proper courts.

Upon the filing of information, a warrant of arrest is issued by the judge upon the finding that the accused is probably guilty of the act or omissions of the law. This is based on probable cause to be determined by the aforementioned judge, taking into consideration, but not limited to the prosecutor’s findings.

In these two instances, in the filing of information or complaint and the issuance of warrant of arrest, evidence is also needed for this will serve as basis to validity of such actions. May electronic documents fall within the ambit of the said rules with regard to these steps taken prior to the institution of criminal and civil proceedings? ( The Rules and the lecture in class only refer to the admissibility of electronic evidence for only civil and criminal actions and proceedings, as well as quasi-judicial and administrative cases. It does not expressly state that this applies to actions taken before it)

This author believes that electronic documents are also admissible with respect to those actions taken before the institution of criminal and civil proceedings. This rests on two points: First, actions taken before the institution of criminal and civil proceedings are crucial and directly connected to these proceedings. Hence, the same rule of admissibility of electronic evidence must apply to them.

As per various rulings in the Supreme Court, if the filing of information to the court was found to not have been done properly by the prosecutor, trial would have to be suspended, and a new preliminary investigation would have to be conducted by the prosecutor. Preliminary investigation plays such an integral role that pains must be taken for it to be conducted properly so as to avoid trial commencing, and only for it to be suspended later on. Thus, the prosecutor must ensure that before information is filed, there are ample facts to back up that said information. Electronic evidence- being a primary source of information in this technologically permeated world right now, being admitted in this part, would then make the filing of information more efficient and based on a solid ground so as to avoid the earlier scenario- the suspension of trials due to a Preliminary investigation improperly conducted.

Now why must that be avoided? This leads to the second point. The Rules on Electronic Evidence was enacted, among others, to facilitate the fast and speedy administration of justice, in terms of rendering judgment. The processes entailed in filing of information and warrants of arrest were prescribed in the Rules of Court to ensure that respectively, the courts are not docketed with needless cases (wasting time and State funds in the process) and that the accused be not subjected to an arduous trial on baseless imputations, which has the same end as the Rules on Electronic Evidence - for the fast and speedy administration of justice. Thus, it would be safe to assume that the framers of the law intended for the Rules on Electronic Evidence to cover the processes even before the trial proceedings to achieve their same and ultimate purpose in making the said Rules.